"GameCyte: I’m starting to agree with you, but I do wonder – you mentioned earlier that you were worried about cutting out 50% of the market because of those who wear glasses, and it would be a bit of an understatement to say more than 50% of gamers still use XP.

AF: I totally agree with you; we’ll certainly look at it down the line and see what we can do, but right now it’s Windows Vista only."

Obviously some type of money coming under the counter from M$.

Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:31 am

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

pixel67 wrote:

This is all conjecture at this point until they actually release the product. I agree with their initial release strategy of using active glasses instead of passive simply because of the image quality. Active glasses used with the current generation of DLP HDTV's offer a ghost free image so hopefully the new 120hz LCD's can offer the same. I can game for hours on end without any eyestrain or nausea. Now, 1-2 years from now this might change as advancements come to polarized technology that reduces or eliminates the ghosting associated with the technology, but the display industry is in the drivers seat unless you sell a bundled solution. IZ3D's own efforts will propel this medium forward. But since Nvidia doesn't make displays, their technology HAD to be compatible with the direction of the display market as a whole. It is very encouraging to hear SLI support! Finally, a GX2 card can fully leverage that second chip!

I see now that your concern is ghosting, but you neglected to define what competing technology ghosts more than shutterglasses.

Shutterglasses are comprised of 2 polarizing layers and a liquid crystal wave retarder(?) that will twist the light so that it cannot pass through the glasses.

Polarization on its own uses a polarized source and a single polarizer over each eye. Since these are simple passive filters they can be of high quality, and the brightness/contrast/color is much better.

Now I think that if you were comparing passive polarization to active polarization you may have been thinking of the display technology. As far as I am concerned Planar and projection are zero-ghosting (within reason, the contrast is very high), and if you use circular polarizing filters you will get no ghosting even at extreme head angles.

Now since shutterglasses are made of twin polarizing layers and an LCD there are a few ways in which they can have reduced contrast:

First they transmit less light when off, and allow more light through when on. I know that there are (expensive $400+) "projection" shutter glasses that are supposed to be very good, possibly with quality near that of passive polarization glasses, but unless nVidia plans on selling us those at $100 or less I can't really see the point. (and if tthey were, don't you think they would tell us, we aren't dummies impressed by flash marketing, we would like to know the polarizing method they use.)

Second, since LCD monitors can be polarized along four axis (to my knowledge): 45°, 135°, 90°, 0° the polarizers in the glasses will effectively act like passive polarizing glasses and either half or fully reduce the view from one eye even when off. This means that you either need up to 4 versions of the glasses, or you need to make the lenses swappable/rotating so that you can adjust it on your end for your monitor. I suppose it could be a different method of polarization, but then why not incorporate that into the heavy advertising?

I look forward to hearing more about your point of view, possibly you meant anaglyph or something else.

Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:44 am

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

quadrophoeniX wrote:

RAGEdemon wrote:

I think this means the Glasses/dongle will have a DVI connectory only...Of course, this means that projectors, HMDs, CRT monitors, or anything else using the old VGA port will not or ever be supported under what they are proposing.

May I dare to disagree, since as we know by now the dongle is an USB one. Also he staed support for "CRTs that have more than 100Hz" Now CRTs only have VGA ins and they all support over 100Hz at some resolution at least. So my 2 cents on this is: there is native support over VGA, S3D will 'maybe' only launch only when actual refresh rate is above 100Hz - you know the old test picture that displayed resolution and refreshrate in use so they actually can detect and dis/enable support..

So much about VGA, DVI is another story though, where they actually have control which exact display is hooked up to the GFX card. And here I strongly believe we have to rely on which displays will be enabled and which not. Which is a pity and I don't see the point - I want to have control myself whether 30 Hz per eye make me throw up or not

Just because you have never seen a CRT with DVI doesn't mean that it doesn't exist , I think there are a few high-end CRTs with DVI (PS TV's with HDMI count as a CRT as well ). I agree that we aren't be tripping over them (they are rare).

This is very interesting (Thank You ), but he again refuses to be honest or open:

Quote:

GameCyte: I’ve heard, and I’ve noticed, in fact, that when shown on a 3D display these games can have problems with overlays.

AF: That’s a good question, but let me try to explain that, because often a lot of people think that they’re rendered wrong. We actually find, when working with developers that actually do game testing with end-users, that when they’re rendering a scene, game developers typically draw all their HUD elements at a depth value – we call it the W value – of 1. From a lighting, modeling, everything-else perspective, they want to make sure that the HUD is always in front of everything else on screen, and a W value of 1 means that it is rendered exactly at screen depth.

For the most part, we actually recommend that game developers do render that at screen depth, the reason being that the HUD has text information, like your chat session for Team Fortress 2, and we’ve found through anecdotal testing that when the stereo value has no separation (which is at screen depth), people can read that much easier. So having that HUD at screen depth is actually a good thing, the way we look at it.

I don't think this answered any pertinent question.

I think we have to wait until hardware/software launch, this is just generating a lot of hype without useful information, I would rather listen to girls talk about clothing (oh god, not really, I was kidding, but almost ). I really don't understand why they can't be upfront, if they don't trust their own product to stand on its own merits how can we? If it isn't competitive with current options (cough*iZ3Dcough) it will be known soon enough, so why not let the enthusiasts make an informed decision? Or just shut up and drop the hardware already?

Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:29 am

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

4th post, sorry I guess (not really).

Quote:

GameCyte: Are there any plans for a polarization solution instead, or is it definitely going to be active shutter all the way?

AF: Right now we truly believe that our solution – the active shutter glasses — provide the best quality for an end-user. The technology that exists for passive polarized is typically only given to you at half-resolution per eye. If you imagine you’re running a monitor at 1680×1050, each eye will only see 1680×525, effectively, because of how the polarization technique has to be done on the LCD in order to show the right eye and hide the left eye. Certainly over time that can be improved; right now, that’s what it is. If you’ve ever seen half-resolution per eye, you know what happens is that the quality of reading text, and the quality of the image, is not as good as you’d like. Some people just don’t think the quality is that good.

With active shutter glasses, the way we’re pursuing the solution right now with ViewSonic, we can enable full resolution per eye.

Hmm, OK, so he is now downplaying the Zalman tech they started supporting (shoot in own foot much?), or should I say dropped all support for any other method in favor of?

And then he completely ignores iZ3D's method, and Planar, and stereo projection (either a single DLP with a circular polarized color wheel, or dual porjectors either linear or circular polarized), citing that "polarization" is half res. Does he know about checkerboard shutter 3D?

Is he ignorant, malicious, or unable legally to release the information to us?

I would like to open a thread where we can ask him the real questions, not these "tech site" questions. He may hem and haw and refuse to give straight answers, but the lack of information can tell us something.

How does your shutter support the native polarization of LCD? Won't the polarizers cancel each other out?

The dual LCD and circular polarized projection methods of sterescopy are very high quality and multi-user (enabling much higher quality and large quantities of users for less money than active glasses), also many already have this equipment, how do you plan to support this installed user base?

Some enthusiasts are knowledgeable technically, do you plan to explain in technical terms how your technology works so they can make an informed decision?

These same enthusiasts have had support terminated for their (at times expensive) 3D setups, what assurances can you give them to support their brand loyalty to nVidia?

Dual displays are the only way to achieve pure stereoscopy, how does nVidia plan on supporting multiple displays?

nVidia is touting the SLi a lot, will multi-display support for SLi be available for these solutions?

Do you have any thoughts on iZ3Ds support of any display solution for any OS on any graphics card? Specifically not their monitor?

One of your hardware competitors offers multi-GPU acceleration for two outputs, iZ3D can take advantage of this, also for hardware solutions that are not related to their monitor. What are you doing to be competitive in this area?

Please add pertinent questions or help me rephrase my questions (if the mods want to move this to a new topic they can, I didn't know where to put it or what to name it, I would rather that there is an official thread.)

I hope that they would respond to these questions (but even a no comment makes them look bad).

I want to assure nVidia that I am not out to make them the bad guy, just looking for info on when they will be competitive in these very important areas.

Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:49 am

CarlKenner

Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!

Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:22 pmPosts: 332

Checkerboard is half-res.

_________________Copy this code to clipboard: 0o1rp5zk then go to http://mtbs3d.com/naw to register. Use the code for $5000 startup bonus, and to support Gaza.

Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:28 am

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

CarlKenner wrote:

Checkerboard is half-res.

I know, it is in my spiel, and one of the questions I would like to ask nVidia.

To clarify, his point is that passive polarization is inferior due to "half res", when that is clearly not true. Both passive and active polarization(shutter) solutions offer half or full res.

This guy seems to be either purposefully misleading, or ignorant. Can we get an engineer? (I suppose no, because then "marketing" wouldn't work.)

Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:03 pm

sharky

3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)

Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 4:08 amPosts: 1819Location: Italy

here is a question:

is there a way for users, to contact nvidia and get an answer? i always have been totally ignored.. not even a "sorry we cant tell"..

is there a way for users, to contact nvidia and get an answer? i always have been totally ignored.. not even a "sorry we cant tell"..

Telling us they can't tell us would let us know too much

But there is no reason for them to let slip that they know that they aren't competitive technologically. (burden of proof is on the consumer that way.)

Thu Sep 18, 2008 1:11 pm

Likay

Petrif-Eyed

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 4:34 pmPosts: 2893Location: Sweden

Lol! I remember when getting my shiny 8800GTX looking forward to real performance in s3d. I bought it when it just was released, unknowingly about the new architecture and coming missing stereosupport.

After some waiting for stereodrivers i eventually got slight angry and wrote to my graphiccard manufacturer about the stereo3d issue (found no nvidiasupport on the issue). I had a responce from them (BFGTech): "We are very sorry that you're not satisfied with our product and we will escalate your complaints to nvidia". And i bet that's the only thing they can do too.

I know, it is in my spiel, and one of the questions I would like to ask nVidia.

To clarify, his point is that passive polarization is inferior due to "half res", when that is clearly not true. Both passive and active polarization(shutter) solutions offer half or full res.

This guy seems to be either purposefully misleading, or ignorant. Can we get an engineer? (I suppose no, because then "marketing" wouldn't work.)

It depends on how you argue.
I would say you need 2 Displays for Planar or dualprojector. If you would set them next to each other you would have 2 times the resolution as you have with only the dualprojector Rig.
So it stays like it is, that you 'only' have half the resolution.

And I don't know about how SG would look with fast LCD technology. Maybe it does ghost very little... But it depends also on the users. If they don't like 60hz per eye and get headaches the passive solution is the way to go... Others do well with 42,5hz per eye and DLP...

And regarding polarization: I think the screen is certified by NV, so they can tell the manufacturer to choos the right polarization angle.

If glasses and screen both have a polarization at 45° and the active polarizer at 135° it wouldn't mean ANY light loss, except when the glasses are shut or the head is turned to the sides.

_________________Play Nations at WAR with this code to get 5.000$ as a Starterbonus:ayqz1u0shttp://mtbs3d.com/naw/

This is all conjecture at this point until they actually release the product. I agree with their initial release strategy of using active glasses instead of passive simply because of the image quality. Active glasses used with the current generation of DLP HDTV's offer a ghost free image so hopefully the new 120hz LCD's can offer the same. I can game for hours on end without any eyestrain or nausea. Now, 1-2 years from now this might change as advancements come to polarized technology that reduces or eliminates the ghosting associated with the technology, but the display industry is in the drivers seat unless you sell a bundled solution. IZ3D's own efforts will propel this medium forward. But since Nvidia doesn't make displays, their technology HAD to be compatible with the direction of the display market as a whole. It is very encouraging to hear SLI support! Finally, a GX2 card can fully leverage that second chip!

Let me clarify. To my knowledge, there currently isn't any image polarization happening with DLP3D Technology and shutterglasses but I am probably wrong as I am not an expert in this field. You don't notice any ghosting because of the fast response time of the display, quick decay, and light blocking principles of the shutterglasses. This is why DLP3D is compatible with new and old shutterglass technology. Active is active regardless of how the light is blocked (polarization based blocking that alternates eyes or physical view obstruction by a dark lense).

I realize that image quality for S3D, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. For me, a ghostless image provides the best immersion. I can tweak the display to give me the brightness and color saturation that I desire so the compromise is worth it for me.

Technically, yes DLP3D is "half res" however I personally can not tell the difference between full res 2D and checkerboard 3D. I just don't see it. ever. But i do see ghosting on all current polarization techniques. I am sure this can and will be addressed with advancements in display and glasses technology, but that isn't where the 2D Display industry is headed short term.

Now, if more folks were making dual layer monitors like IZ3D, or the folks at Corning come up with a better polarization barrier (see Neils story today), then things could change for the better for passive polarization and all the drawbacks could be removed. This wouldn't surprise me a bit.

In the end, I really couldn't care less what technology or company prevails, as long as image quality is the driver and not sacrificed. I am more concerned about native rendering standards being put in place long before the image reaches the monitor. Native S3D "in the game" means I could use any video card regardless of age and manufacturer. The standard needs to start there and finish at the monitor.

I was not aware that there was any polarization.. I thought they just flip on and off, or is that how they do it? By changing the polarization in the lenses?

Thu Sep 18, 2008 2:49 pm

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

Welder wrote:

Hmm I guess I need to learn more about shutter glasses

I was not aware that there was any polarization.. I thought they just flip on and off, or is that how they do it? By changing the polarization in the lenses?

I thought they were called LCD shutter glasses, and the LCD in the glasses goes from clear to um, not clear via LCD technology, which is polarization.

See the episode on watches by Tim Hunkin in "the Secret Life of Machines", he covers LCD tech (puts it together in front of your eyes and tests it!!)

I know of no shutter glasses that operate on any other method than LCD except some "spinning disk with holes in it" models for the Vectrex or Sega Genesis/Mega Drive.

Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:25 pm

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

pixel67 wrote:

Now, if more folks were making dual layer monitors like IZ3D, or the folks at Corning come up with a better polarization barrier (see Neils story today), then things could change for the better for passive polarization and all the drawbacks could be removed. This wouldn't surprise me a bit.

In the end, I really couldn't care less what technology or company prevails, as long as image quality is the driver and not sacrificed. I am more concerned about native rendering standards being put in place long before the image reaches the monitor. Native S3D "in the game" means I could use any video card regardless of age and manufacturer. The standard needs to start there and finish at the monitor.

DLP3D is not the mainstream LCD tech that nVidia is pimping.

Have you personally compared a Planar to a Shutterglasses solution? How can you say you have tried passive polarization if not?

See above discussion of LCD tech hinging on polarization, AFAIK shutter glasses need to use LCDs to switch, and thus need twin polarizing layers in the glasses.

I agree with you that standards need to be implemented. But the standard display technology should be every method supported (and IMHO the tech is so similar and simple by the time you get to display that lack of support is clearly on purpose.) Each tech has different pricing, different skill levels to construct, different target audiences, Etc, etc.

I don't see why you can't game 4-player on a DLP TV in passive circular polarization (the passive filter could be checkerboard pattern, the method could be interleaved video transmision, or frame sequential), then you would need inexpensive glasses for each player instead of expensive glasses.

I think we may need to establish the baseline technical knowledge of this forum, I assumed that everyone was aware of basic technical things, but it isn't as I thought. (I am more into hardware/physics, so software is not my forte..)

Edit: I think that it is possible for LCD shutter glasses to be made so that they are better, but they cost $400 or more per person just for a single pair of glasses to reach the same level of quality as my Planar setup can get for $400 total system cost, and that includes 2 monitors, a stand, and a 10-pack of $3 glasses.

I am more specialized with my knowledge with iZ3D. I'm learning more and more as I go though

Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:49 pm

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

Cool, I edited my last post a bit btw.

Just to be clear, a polarizing layer applied to the surface of a TV (DLP or CRT or LCD or Plasma), with one half circular left and the other half circular right polarized negates the need for any active circuitry, just wear a $3 pair of glasses and see in 3D

DLP has the color wheel advantage (until Laser DLP ditches the color wheel that is), because the wheel can be circular polarized, thus any display (front or rear projection) that preserves the polarization will work.

Now I won't say that shutterglasses can't work nearly as well or better, depending on the quality of the materials and workmanship, but passive seems good to me because when rendered you don't need to sync anything, charge anything, worry about breaking anything, you get my point: it is simpler.

Perhaps for larger displays it may not be cost effective, but if 3D starts to become mainstream we will see checkerboard polarization, it is too simple not to do (Zalman sells them for crying out loud, they just didn't make them checkerboard ).

All said and done, if nVidia wants to offer us $400 current market quality glasses for $100 and start supporting games properly I am all for it. But iZ3D seems to have better software, and you can build equal hardware simply, so I don't see the real draw until more info is released, which won't happen from nVidia. Did nvidia promise DirectX 7 support in Vista? That is hilarious considering their DX7 techdemos haven't even functioned in 2D display for about 5 years

Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:04 pm

da_giz

Two Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 8:46 amPosts: 74Location: Germany

What I still don't get is why you state that shutterglasses would be polarized.
I always thought they just go black and clear, where is the polarization there?

When I mean polarization I mean polarisation of rays of light so they are aligned to one angle like this | for left eye and this __ for right eye.

I was not aware that there was any polarization.. I thought they just flip on and off, or is that how they do it? By changing the polarization in the lenses?

I thought they were called LCD shutter glasses, and the LCD in the glasses goes from clear to um, not clear via LCD technology, which is polarization.

See the episode on watches by Tim Hunkin in "the Secret Life of Machines", he covers LCD tech (puts it together in front of your eyes and tests it!!)

I know of no shutter glasses that operate on any other method than LCD except some "spinning disk with holes in it" models for the Vectrex or Sega Genesis/Mega Drive.

Well I can't speak for all glasses, because I own only Elsa RVs. But these glasses are definitly polarized when they are off. I bet the LCD adds another polarizer at 90° to the first, so that there can about 0 light go through both these polarizer layers.
If the first (passive) polarizer isn't at right direction you get a black screen on LCDs when watching through it. I have it for LCD display of a watch or a neighbour when having a lan.

It makes sense if they always use the same technology. The only difference in the SG might be how much light they stop and how fast they shut... and how much of the 'right' light is lost

Oh and if you put 2 glasses over each other and one is turned by 90° it is black, too...

Well however DLP would be easy to change, but the producer has to agree... And you would need some internal doubling and switch between the images each frame - each halve circle of the wheel...

_________________Play Nations at WAR with this code to get 5.000$ as a Starterbonus:ayqz1u0shttp://mtbs3d.com/naw/

What I still don't get is why you state that shutterglasses would be polarized.I always thought they just go black and clear, where is the polarization there?

When I mean polarization I mean polarisation of rays of light so they are aligned to one angle like this | for left eye and this __ for right eye.

Are you sure shutterglasses do that kind of thing?

Shutterglasses use a 1 pixel black&white LCD pannel for each eye. At least that's the way my elsa 3d-revelator work.

LCD pannel technology requires the use of 2 polarizers and the liquid cristal layer which is able to modify the angle of polarisation depending on the electric charge applied to them.
I'm not an physician or an LCD engineer so i won't tell you much more on how or why.

Search the internet for more info on polarisation and how to make an LCD pannel.

Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:49 am

turls

One Eyed Hopeful

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:03 amPosts: 5

nubie wrote:

DLP has the color wheel advantage (until Laser DLP ditches the color wheel that is), because the wheel can be circular polarized, thus any display (front or rear projection) that preserves the polarization will work.

LED DLPs from Samsung ditched the color wheel long ago as well. These units support 3D DLP the same as the Mits that nVidia is pushing.

There are also FP solutions that are ditching the bulb, which is the achilles' heel of DLP tech. They are being replaced with LEDs as well. The LEDs will get brighter and brighter over time, as they have up to this point (which is why Samsung was able to do a 67" version this year).

Anyway, I wish someone in one of the many articles I've read would ask what the difference in nVidia support is for Mits and Samsung. Because it sure looks like it is exactly the same 120hz technology, and any advantage Mits would have over Samsung is artificially imposed by nVidia.

Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:07 am

ssiu

Binocular Vision CONFIRMED!

Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 8:11 amPosts: 320

turls wrote:

Anyway, I wish someone in one of the many articles I've read would ask what the difference in nVidia support is for Mits and Samsung. Because it sure looks like it is exactly the same 120hz technology, and any advantage Mits would have over Samsung is artificially imposed by nVidia.

Well, the answer to question 2 in the article seems to be very clear that they won't artificially cripple display support:

Quote:

Our goal for display support is to enable as many displays as we can that support the new NVIDIA 3D glasses. As new displays come on the market that support high quality stereoscopic 3D, we will test them to make sure that they work with our 3D glasses and we’ll enable support in our software. We want to enable a large ecosystem with a large installed base of users, so this is not a licensing program for monitor makers to work with NVIDIA 3D glasses.

The "generic Texas Instruments checkerboard pattern 3D" applies to Samsung HDTVs (and nobody else, at this moment). I can understand that they mention Mitsubishi specifically and not Samsung, if Mitsubishi partners with them and Samsung does not.

I guess we'll only know for sure when the glasses come out.

Fri Sep 19, 2008 1:00 pm

nubie

Sharp Eyed Eagle!

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:49 pmPosts: 419

BlackShark wrote:

da_giz wrote:

What I still don't get is why you state that shutterglasses would be polarized.I always thought they just go black and clear, where is the polarization there?

When I mean polarization I mean polarisation of rays of light so they are aligned to one angle like this | for left eye and this __ for right eye.

Are you sure shutterglasses do that kind of thing?

Shutterglasses use a 1 pixel black&white LCD pannel for each eye. At least that's the way my elsa 3d-revelator work.

LCD pannel technology requires the use of 2 polarizers and the liquid cristal layer which is able to modify the angle of polarisation depending on the electric charge applied to them.I'm not an physician or an LCD engineer so i won't tell you much more on how or why.

Search the internet for more info on polarisation and how to make an LCD pannel.

If we had a set of shutters built specifically for the LCD in question we could use shutterglasses with only one polarizing layer, at the expense of educating consumers to understand what polarization their monitor has.

You would need adjustable glasses or 4 different ones. But it certainly isn't difficult to do.

I hate the way that Andrew Fear guy just ignores the questions and says how great nVidia is...

What he's basically saying is "Buy our nVidia stuff, it's such fantastic quality. We don't care that you already have a 3D solution, and no, we won't support it anymore. We were unable to fix the bugs in our 162.50 solution, so we're gonna just scrap that idea. Spend your next paycheck on Vista and the monitor that we say you must buy. An HMD? What the hell is that? Shutter glasses, that's the future!"

Should I throw away my 3DVisor now?

My next graphics card will be an ATI!

Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:26 pm

crim3

Certif-Eyed!

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 3:11 amPosts: 642Location: Valencia (Spain)

I'm having a sinister wish lately: that all this promotion of stereo-3D finishes as soon as possible and we can have our 'legacy' stereo hardware working again instead of having it artificialy disabled due to economical interest (by means of the partialy restricted driver in question).
Nvidia is a company. Its target is not to give as video hardware or stereo-3D. It's here to make money, which is absolutely valid, of course! We all like money.

Now they are gazing a 'new' market and want to maximize the benefits that could arise from it. But once all this fails (it will in my opinion) the economical interest will dissapear, as before, and we will have our driver working again with the same code that exists from a decade (I don't know for sure, is just a guess based on stereo-3D advertising in my old game magazines) that is a forbiden object of desire hidden in the vista driver right now (it's there, in some dll, in your very own computer!, but disabled, that's the most annoying).

I hope that, once everything ends, all this effort will mean a better infrastructure (specially software infrastructure) for us stereo freaks.

a forbiden object of desire hidden in the vista driver right now (it's there, in some dll, in your very own computer!, but disabled, that's the most annoying).

Im really surprised that no one has hacked these drivers yet. Can no one do it? I don’t know the first thing about hacking but I saw the movie “Hackers” so I know that Angelina Jolie can do it. So why cant we?

We should send a z800 to Angelina Jolie to get her interested. Oh wait, they cost like a billion dollars now. Now that I think about it, she is the only one who can even afford a z800 now

"Im really surprised that no one has hacked these drivers yet. Can no one do it?"

A president once said ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. Why don't you go to the library and read a few programming books - I think even MIT has many free courses on the internet now. Educate yourself and then contribute to the community. I can tell you now the path you have chosen for your life, constantly having others do for you and not doing for yourself will leave you with many frustrating nights in your future. The knowledge is out there to learn, it is only up to you to take the time and force it into your brain. Madonna said something about those whose happiness depends on the permission of another are really sad people, I saw her old boyfriend on TV the other night, vanilla ice - he said he didn't need madonna to be happy anymore. Break free from relying on others to bring your happiness - do for yourself young innovator!

"I don’t know the first thing about hacking but I saw the movie “Hackers” so I know that Angelina Jolie can do it. So why cant we?"

LOL! That is a very good question, how can any geek worth his salt accept being upstanded by the daughter of that guy that played midnight cowboy with ratso - if I were you the shame alone would make all my nights sleepless and I would spend all those insomniac hours reading about hacking and programming so that I wouldn't be left behind when Yuri brings "the matrix" to the masses and had some understanding of the technology I was implementing in my personal life. Sheesh - she let billy bob thornton tattoo stuff on her body - you have to be able to do better than her right? She divorced that guy she filmed hackers with, she was way too smart for him and traded up to billy bob, the true kaiser soze of our day. Don't be outdone by her!

"We should send a z800 to Angelina Jolie to get her interested. Oh wait, they cost like a billion dollars now. Now that I think about it, she is the only one who can even afford a z800 now"

LOL! Why should she get so much money?!? I just saw her in that movie changeling and her performance was nothing special - but John Malkovich - he just gets better and better in every film I see that guy - I bet even that guy he played in "of mice and men" could spend some time reading some programming books couldn't he?

"Im really surprised that no one has hacked these drivers yet. Can no one do it?"

A president once said ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. Why don't you go to the library and read a few programming books - I think even MIT has many free courses on the internet now. Educate yourself and then contribute to the community. I can tell you now the path you have chosen for your life, constantly having others do for you and not doing for yourself will leave you with many frustrating nights in your future. The knowledge is out there to learn, it is only up to you to take the time and force it into your brain. Madonna said something about those whose happiness depends on the permission of another are really sad people, I saw her old boyfriend on TV the other night, vanilla ice - he said he didn't need madonna to be happy anymore. Break free from relying on others to bring your happiness - do for yourself young innovator!

Have youe ever heard from the principe of shared work?No one can be specialist in all fields mostly you are specal in one subject, might two. And an specialist ist always better in his area than an allrounder. So lets have a look at the Industry (in example): While the Ingeneer is developing the Display panel of an IZ3D he has no knowlege of Programming. In the other way the Driver programmer doesn't know how an LCD panel is build. But when they work together they compile together an make an better End-Product than if one have leared the Programming and Engineering.

Your statement from above is some way of typical American motivation bla bla. "You have the power, You have the might, You can make it, We want you"Shure ther have to be people that are contributing to the community, but I think Linus Towald can't tell you how an (Automobile-)engine work... There have to be specialist, when everyone knows everything we will be ther where we was: Single Individuals or small groups of people wandering arround in the wilderness, becaus there is no need to build up large communties.

I did read a book called "the mythical man month" - can you explain the tenets of that work to me? Is it wrong?

"No one can be specialist in all fields mostly you are specal in one subject, might two."

Benjamin Franklin is rolling in his grave, quitters never win.

"And an specialist ist always better in his area than an allrounder."

The educated idiots I could tell you about when working at IBM.

"So lets have a look at the Industry (in example):"

Let me give you real world experience and take some of that rosy colored shine off your eyeballs, a long time ago in a galaxy far away there was this researcher working for a company called IBM in Armonk. He researched and developed new lithographic type processes to make chips smaller and faster and more efficient. Some MBA type who liked to play golf and was specialized in running numbers to profit from his stock options decided to shelve this stuff and put that guy in a dark cold closet where a mainframe freezer used to reside. The researcher was invited to play golf and to understand the value of stock options, but he grew restless and wandered off to somewhere in asia. Later on IBM got to license the very technology they paid to research and develop from some Asian company this guy was now working for - whodathunk? The rube goldberg policies that make up the complexity of the modern world just don't fit into your simplified examples - devils and details frustrate a lot of people so they just choose not to deal with them.

"While the Ingeneer is developing the Display panel of an IZ3D he has no knowlege of Programming. In the other way the Driver programmer doesn't know how an LCD panel is build. But when they work together they compile together an make an better End-Product than if one have leared the Programming and Engineering."

Today the world economy is blowing up because nobody was able to see the forest for the trees anymore, too many specialists, too few leanardo davinci renaissance men, the proof is in the pudding, just turn on your tv or read your local news.

"Your statement from above is some way of typical American motivation bla bla."

Nation states and national pride is so last century.

"Shure ther have to be people that are contributing to the community, but I think Linus Towald can't tell you how an (Automobile-)engine work..."

He knew a lot about transmeta though didn't he? That flopped though - I asked my mazda dealer why there are not more rotary engines out there.

"There have to be specialist, when everyone knows everything we will be ther where we was: Single Individuals or small groups of people wandering arround in the wilderness, becaus there is no need to build up large communties."

I agree a lot with what you say, but my friend, a good citizen of the world is abreast of a great many different things, and too much specialization is as great a travesty as too little, moderation in all things. I like to think of all the humans in that scifi show LEXX who kept feeding the big bug, so specialized in their own little tasks they didn't know they were helping create their own armageddon. Kind like the financial blowup the world is going through now. The cube with that canadian scientist guy from stargate atlantis is also a good example.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum